Issue 7294 - Produce W3C validated HTML and CSS code for the websites core
Summary: Produce W3C validated HTML and CSS code for the websites core
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Infrastructure
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: Website general issues (show other issues)
Version: current
Hardware: All All
: P2 Trivial with 2 votes (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: lsuarezpotts
QA Contact: issues@www
URL:
Keywords: oooqa
Depends on: 41162 41163
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2002-08-27 23:10 UTC by ooo
Modified: 2010-08-25 12:36 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description ooo 2002-08-27 23:10:56 UTC
As an Open Source project the website for OpenOffice.org should 
follow W3C's specifications for HTML and CSS.

This can easily be validated by the HTML validator:

  http://validator.w3.org/

and by the CSS validator:

  http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html

I hope this will be one of the main focus when the site will 
be updated generally.

Only through open standards and specifications Open Source has 
the oppertunity to win so we should use them as much as possible.
Comment 1 lsuarezpotts 2002-08-28 06:44:19 UTC
Hi, Claus,
Well, we would like to follow the standards; your suggestion is hardly new.
Join the website project: http://website.openoffice.org/
best
louis 
Comment 2 stx123 2002-11-18 11:19:41 UTC
Louis, I think part of the effort has to be done by CN in SC. Would 
you like to coordinate with support?
Comment 3 ooo 2003-03-11 10:25:05 UTC
How later will this issue be resolved?

We would like the world to use OASIS Open Office XML as the file
format for exchanging office documents.

But we lack to support the W3C specifications for our own website.

The HTML code I create for the Danish native language project
validates as HTML 4.01.

Comment 4 Unknown 2003-03-13 03:09:13 UTC
Don't forget to ensure W3 accessibility guidelines:
http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp
Comment 5 stp 2003-08-30 06:53:04 UTC
I strongly support the demand for a W3C valid website. 

Native-lang projects like da.openoffice.org have a had time validating
the HTML-code for our N-L pages, because W3C's validation service
returns several errors for the mainmenu etc.

How can we help? or is this solely a supplier issue?
Comment 6 lsuarezpotts 2003-08-30 21:26:54 UTC
hi
it's a supplier issue. But it's also the responsibility of each Project Lead to make sure 
his web pages conform as closely as possible to w3c standards. We are upgrding to a 
new platform for OOo that is pretty close to w3c standards. You are welcome to join 
the team; Cristian Driga is leading design.  let me know directly if you are interested. 
You will have to sign an nda with collabnet.
louis
Comment 7 stp 2003-12-15 13:54:03 UTC
The HTML for the DA.OpenOffice.org subproject is valid XHTML. I am not
interested in signing a NDA, and the new site is now online.

Following this link should help the developers get started with writing valid
code: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.openoffice.org

Adding myself as cc:
Adjusting summary.
Reassigning to www component owner.
Comment 8 lohmaier 2005-01-24 00:02:02 UTC
I just filed issue 41162 and issue 41163

If these two are fixed, then it is possible to create valid xhtml-transitional.
Instead of the main-page, try the german-lang page which (apart from the above
issues) already is valid xhtml.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://de.openoffice.org

da-project and the main site contain additional errors not influenced by the
automatic additions.
Comment 9 stx123 2005-02-02 12:26:22 UTC
The issue 41162 and issue 41163 are fixed and the de homepage passes the HTML
validation without error. If someone is interested in filing subissues for CSS
errors...
Comment 10 eric.savary 2005-05-26 23:00:59 UTC
I removed the keyword 'accessibility' of this issue (issue 7294) because
(external) queries use (blind) this keyword to evaluate the accessibility of the
product (OOo) itself.
Even if the validation conforming to w3c leads to improvements in accessibility:
- this keyword should be reserved for the product and not the web site
- this keyword should be reserved for issues concerning accessibility issues
*and only accessibility issues*.

Thank you for your understanding.
Comment 11 stp 2005-08-05 10:16:28 UTC
As of now:
www.openoffice.org/branding/css/tigris.css is valid -
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=www.openoffice.org%2Fbranding%2Fcss%2Ftigris.css&warning=1&profile=css2&usermedium=all
www.openoffice.org/branding/css/inst.css is valid - 
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=www.openoffice.org%2Fbranding%2Fcss%2Finst.css&warning=1&profile=css2&usermedium=all
www.openoffice.org/branding/css/print.css is valid - 
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=www.openoffice.org%2Fbranding%2Fcss%2Fprint.css&warning=1&profile=css2&usermedium=all

I can also produce valid HTML for da-project.

Therefore, this issue can either be resolved as fixed or used as a "pass the
monkey" reminder for projects writing invalid HTML.

Reassigning to louis since he is owner of the project webworks.
Comment 12 lsuarezpotts 2005-08-10 19:20:56 UTC
I'd like to close this as fixed and leave it in public memory for the fixes it demonstrates.
will reference it from website project
closing.
thanks all.
louis
Comment 13 ace_dent 2008-05-17 21:56:23 UTC
The Issue you raised has been marked as 'Resolved' and not updated within the
last 1 year+. I am therefore setting this issue to 'Verified' as the first step
towards Closing it. If you feel this is incorrect, please re-open the issue and
add any comments.

Many thanks,
Andrew
 
Cleaning-up and Closing old Issues
~ The Grand Bug Squash, pre v3 ~
http://marketing.openoffice.org/3.0/announcementbeta.html
Comment 14 ace_dent 2008-05-18 00:01:32 UTC
As per previous posting: Verified -> Closed.
A Closed Issue is a Happy Issue (TM).

Regards,
Andrew
Comment 15 Unknown 2010-07-11 23:47:13 UTC
Created attachment 70507
Comment 16 Unknown 2010-08-24 12:04:39 UTC
Created attachment 71276
Comment 17 Unknown 2010-08-25 12:36:00 UTC
Created attachment 71335